Showing posts with label Hillary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hillary. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 02, 2007

Did Hillary Clinton help start a criminal enterprise?

 
LGF links to an intriguing YouTube video. Hillary Clinton, while speaking at the embarrassing YearlyKos event, admits that “I helped start Media Matters.”

That's the same Media Matters linked to billionaire moonbat George Soros, who Investors' Business Daily calls a "threat to America." And that's the same Media Matters which attorney Mark Levin believes is a criminal enterprise.

If I were Hillary, I wouldn't be crowing about founding Media Matters. Not with the IRS circling.

Monday, October 01, 2007

I guess we found the Clintons' favorite restaurant

 
It figures they love Chinese food.

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Pre-impeach Hillary Clinton!

 
There's a new rallying cry for those on both the left and the right:

For the back story, read about Hillary and campaign skulduggery, China, and immigration.

And apologies in advance for the elevated blood pressure.

Hat tip: Peter Paul

Mark Levin: Media Matters is a Criminal Enterprise

 
Radio host Mark Levin was on a tear Friday (via Hot Air):

This MoveOn.org, which was created specifically as the brown-shirts of the Clinton crime family... they have these phony think-tanks... and we get to this group, run by David Brock, called Media Matters... I knew David Brock when he was conservative and Republican...

Media Matters claims to be a non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt organization... it's not allowed to get involved in politics... because you and I are subsidizing it, because it's tax exempt... yet they have never criticized a leftist talk show host on Air America, ever. They have never criticized Keith Olbermann, never. They only criticize the meda when the media does a story that is unfavorable to the [Clinton] crime family leaders...

I believe they are in clear violation of the Internal Revenue Code, the 501(c)(3) status that's been conferred on them... I believe every time they file a tax return, telling the government that 'we're non-political, non-partisan' and that they sign the tax-return on penalty of perjury, I believe that they're committing perjury.

If there was ever a lawsuit against this group, and there was full discovery of emails, phone logs, and testimony under oath or in depositions, the whole game would be up and they'd be completely exposed for what they are. Which is: a criminal enterprise, in the sense that they are, in my view... violating the tax code...

Until listening to Hot Air's replay of Levin's comments, I had never realized how politically active Media Matters really is. Do a search on Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney on the MM site and you'll see a stunning, one-sided theme that gives every appearance of a Clinton front site.

Here's a quick -- but by no means complete -- gallery of items from the Media Matters site captured in just the last week.




From the looks of things, Hillary's scared to death of Mitt Romney.

So, exactly what are the tax-exemption requirements for 501(c)(3) organizations -- as Media Matters claims it is? The IRS describes them this way:

To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3)... it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates...

Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct...

For a 501(c)(3) organization, the IRS neatly defines "Political Campaign Activity."

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise tax... voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that: (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

Check and mate, morons.

Please go to the IRS site and do what I did: report Media Matters' utterly partisan activities as suspected tax fraud. You may be entitled to a reward for the report.

It's high time that taxpayers stopped subsidizing a political action committee for Hillary Clinton.

Also see: Flopping Aces, The Shadow Party

Best of the August and September Posts

 
We'll be revamping the blog's sidebar shortly. In the mean time, here's a quick and illustrated digest of some popular posts (i.e., they received more than twelve hits) from the last couple of months.




Hillary's Own Stain and Body Remover





Read the Disclaimers before Voting



Berger to Host 9/11 Truther Special



Latest Bin Laden Transcript - Illustrated



A free Seattle postcard for you



Hillary Clinton's A-List Donors



Ten worst branding decisions of all-time



Hurricane Paul threatens Hill's campaign



The Adventures of Barack Obama



First annual Celebrity Hostage Draft!


Saturday, September 29, 2007

The long arm of the law appears to be closing in on Hillary

 
You may not have heard of Doug from Upland, but odds are you will in the months to come. Over at Free Republic, Doug describes his dogged pursuit of justice against Hillary Clinton's financial skulduggery.

In addition to publicizing the well known Peter Paul civil case against the Clintons, Doug has been on the warpath as the case heats up.

This afternoon, I spoke with a field agent of the FBI in Los Angeles. In broad daylight, a major campaign finance fraud was committed, and no one seems to want to do anything about it. After hearing the story, I was invited to come in on Monday to speak to a field agent. I'll be there...

The evidence to which Doug refers is the newly released "HIllary Clinton 'smoking-gun' video." The preface to the tape states that it "shows Hillary Clinton in the process of committing at least four or five felonies under federal election law".

The Federal Elections Commission already fined Clinton's 2000 campaign committee for underreporting cash it received at the fundraising event Paul sponsored. The underreported contributions led to the federal indictment of David Rosen, Hillary's campaign finance director. Paul says the video "proves Clinton and her campaign [lied to the] FEC [and] the grand jury investigation that led to Rosen's indictment."

Put simply, if Hillary participated in the planning or coordination of the Paul fundraiser, it "...would make Paul's contributions a direct donation to her Senate campaign rather than her joint fundraising committee, violating federal statutes that limit 'hard money' contributions to a candidate to $2,000 per person. Knowingly accepting or soliciting $25,000 or more in a calendar year is a felony carrying a prison sentence of up to five years..."

Did Hillary know? Well, in the newly released video, Hillary is heard exclaiming:

...What ever it is you're doing, is it okay that I thank you?

...I'm very appreciative... it sounds fabulous, I got a full report from Kelly... uh... today, when she got back, and told me everything that... uh... you're doing and it just sounds like it's gonna be a great event...

In other words, Hillary just got busted. She was involved, she helped coordinate the event, and her White House aide (Kelly Craighead) assisted as well.

So why was the video only released a few months ago, if it captures a conversation from 2000? Doug from Upland:

After the FBI, I'll be stopping by the federal courthouse to deliver a package to Judge A. Howard Matz, who presided of the criminal trial of David Rosen. A complaint against Matz for judicial misconduct is being prepared. Matz made incredible statements before a word of evidence was heard.

Among other things, Matz said: ["Hillary Clinton is not in the loop in any direct way and this is something the jury will be told... this isn't a trial about Senator Clinton. Senator Clinton has no stake in the trial, not a party or principal."]

Perhaps Judge Matz should hold in contempt someone in a US Attorney's office who withheld the "smoking gun video" while official investigations and a criminal trial were proceeding. The FEC exonerated Hillary without seeing that evidence. Then, the Senate Ethics Committee used the flawed FEC report and acquittal of Rosen to exonerate Hillary again. Even while the Republicans were in control of the Senate, they refused the offer of testimony from Peter Paul, claiming that they did a thorough investigation.

In other words, Matz was either horrifically ignorant or he flat-out lied to cover Hillary. The smoking-gun video seems to establish Hillary's culpability -- beyond a shadow of a doubt.

And just why was the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York sitting on evidence (for a half dozen years) that could corroborate Hillary's involvement in Paul's fundraising? Was it due to the fact that the Senator from New York supervises the US Attorney -- resulting in the obstruction of investigations that improperly exonerated Hillary Clinton?

In 2005, on Hannity & Colmes, Doug Schoen, former Clinton advisor, said: "[This case] has nothing to do with Senator Clinton... In this context, as Alan [Colmes] suggested, the prosecutors himself has said she has no knowledge."

Like Judge Matz, the prosecutors and Schoen are either corrupt or woefully ignorant. Perhaps the FBI can find out which. And, while they're at it, perhaps they could discover why the U.S. Attorney held on to evidence that the FEC could have used during the trial.

Update: The San Francisco Chronicle has picked up Doug's story, albeit under the theme of Hillary's polarizing effect. Author Carla Marinucci would do well to explore the Smoking-Gun Video, the bizarre redactions of the Barrett Report, the Rose Law Firm records, China-gate and the Cox Report, Travelgate, the cattle futures fiasco, etc., etc.

Related reading: Equal Justice Foundation, Hillary Clinton Accountability Project, and Peter Paul; Tom Fitton: Ten Unanswered Questions for Hillary Clinton

Another Clinton Contributor Vanishes

 

Clarice Feldman:

Flip Pidot, the go-to-guy on the Hsu scandal, notices that Winkle Paw seems to have vanished. Paw, as you may recall, is a close business associate of Norman Hsu and fellow big-bucks contributor to Democrats.

"Paw has served as everything from project analyst to CEO at a handful of Hsu's companies, including Components, Ltd., Next Components, Next Electronics, and CoolPowers (though that last one could've been a poor transcription of the word 'Components' by a Tom Harkin campaign staffer)."

A pretty important potential witness in case with great importance. But apparently he was not being sought. Flip continues:

"We also don't know for sure that Winkle has deliberately vanished. It could simply be that the authorities aren't looking for him (he's not listed as wanted in California). But if they're not hunting for him, maybe they ought to be. The Orange County investors haven't been able to reach him since the morning Hsu lit out for Denver. That was three weeks ago. If - let's say - Paw was on that train too, keeping his cool a bit better than his pill-popping partner, and if he had access to even a small fraction of the millions in liquid assets at Hsu's disposal, Winkle just may have winked out of this story for good."

Perhaps It all depends on what the meaning of "missing" is...

More info: What is it with the Clintons, China, and Satellites? and Gateway Pundit's Clinton Administration Record Book

Thursday, September 27, 2007

What is it with the Clintons, China, and Satellites?

 
According to Wikipedia, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) is an "agency of the United States Government with the primary mission of collection, analysis, and distribution of geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) in support of national security."

The NGA website describes a declassification effort for satellite imagery that was initiated by Bill Clinton in 1995. The declassification process hit high gear in 1997 at the behest of then-acting DCI George Tenet.

At the time, Senator Bob Kerrey -- who is now president of the progressive New School -- funded the declassification project, providing several million dollars in support.

Kerrey has since been heavily involved with satellite imagery, attending various conferences and seminars.

“I watched our military use, analyze, enhance and distribute these new [GMT] images in order to prepare our war fighters for battle and to help our peacemakers avoid the battle in the first place,” Kerrey said last August at the 26th Annual International User Conference held by ESRI, a leading global information system company...

Put simply, Kerrey is an expert at satellite imagery and helped facilitate the declassification of the U.S. Government's satellite data in conjunction with Bill Clinton and George Tenet.

Here's where things get interesting.

1) Kerrey has secured DOD contracts for the famously progressive and anti-war New School, where he now serves as president.

2) The New School also has deep ties to Bernard Schwartz, former head of Loral. Schwartz was reportedly involved with donations by the Chinese military to the Democratic National Committee in exchange for the right to access sensitive missile technologies. This technology may have been one of the main reasons that China was able to destroy a satellite in space this year, touching off fears of an arms race in space.

3) The New School reserved a prestigious post for Norman Hsu, Hillary Clinton's fundraiser extraordinaire-cum-fugitive (also a Chinese national), possibly at Schwartz's request.

4) The New School has other close connections to China through its ICI arm (the India-China Institute).

5) The New School has at least eight large donation bundlers (Hillraisers) in various board-level or trusteeship positions; these are folks who have each funneled $100,000 or more to Hillary

6) Hillary has sent her own pork-barrel contracts to the New School (e.g., a $1 million federal grant).

What is it with the Clintons, China, and satellites?

And what the heck is going on with the anti-war New School, its bizarre relationship with the military-industrial complex, and its astonishing number of "Hillraisers" (the elite $100K+ donation bundlers)?

Where the hell is Mike Wallace when you need him? Not that CBS would ever investigate Democrats, mind you, but still.

Also see:

Is the New School a cutout between China and the Clintons?

Congressional Record: Timeline of Clinton-China Decisions

Update: PrairiePundit and Mitchell Langbert and have picked up the story. More to come. Unless, as Reliapundit speculates, I turn up dead. If so, I ask you -- all three of my dear and valued readers -- to avenge me.

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Is the New School a conduit between China and the Clintons?

 
Possibly. At minimum, it's a bizarre tit-for-tat as funds go to the New School and board-members/trustees of the school send funds to Hillary. Consider these intriguing discoveries:

1) The New School -- a famously progressive, anti-war institution -- is quietly engaged in sensitive work for the DOD thanks to -- apparently -- Bob Kerrey's stewardship and possibly Hillary Clinton's direction

2) The New School also has deep ties to Bernard Schwartz, former head of Loral, who allegedly instigated donations by the Chinese military to the DNC in exchange for the right to access sensitive missile technologies

3) The New School reserved a prestigious post for Norman Hsu, Hillary Clinton's fundraiser extraordinaire-cum-fugitive (also a Chinese national), possibly at Schwartz's request

4) The New School has another deep connection to China through its ICI arm (the India-China Institute)

4) The New School has at least eight large donation bundlers (Hillraisers) in various board-level or trusteeship positions; these are folks who have each funneled $100,000 or more to Hillary

5) Hillary has sent her own pork-barrel contracts to the New School (e.g., a $1 million federal grant)

To summarize, a fugitive, bankrupt Chinese national -- connected to Bernard Schwartz, who played a role in the release of national security secrets working with the Chinese government -- somehow acquires huge wealth and donates hundreds of thousands of dollars to the leading Democratic candidates... along with several other folks at the New School.

Over at Daily Kos, commenter Golem666 comments:

...Bernard L. Schwartz, who worked for the Chinese shell company that the Clintons gave the ballistic missile technology [for] Bill Clinton's re-election, put Norman Hsu on the Board of Trustees of the New School in NY.

Hillary Clinton ear-marked 750,000 dollars to the New School recently as a pork barrel project.

Bernard L. Schwartz taught the Communist Chinese party how to build ICBM's which could make it out of the lower atmosphere.

This was one of the main reasons that China was able to destroy a satellite in space this year, touching of fears of a new arms race in space...

This is disturbing stuff.

Why does the New School appear to be both a beneficiary and a source of funds to Hillary? Given Hsu, Schwartz, and the tarnished history of the Clinton administration, is China's government linked somehow? If so, what is China getting in return -- besides access to a presidential front-runner? And why is the notoriously progressive, anti-war New School working for the DOD?

Also: the New School has a direct affiliation with China and India through its "India-China Institute".

My question is... is the New School a more clever cutout for China/Clinton linkages than Johnny Chung and the Lippo Group?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Hat tip: Larwyn

Sunday, September 23, 2007

The "Hillraisers" go to School. The New School, that is.

 
A few days ago, Suitably Flip's phenomenal analysis linked fugitive Clinton fundraiser Norman Hsu to the former ownership of the Lillian Vernon (LV) company. Fred Hochberg, son of the founder, had contribution patterns that uncannily match those of Hsu. Or maybe cannily -- if that's a word -- given the ties between the two.

The annual report of The New School -- a liberal arts college in New York -- lists both Hsu and Hochberg as board members/trustees. In addition, Bernard Schwartz, former CEO and Chairman of Loral Space & Communications is also among the members of that august group.

The name Loral may ring a bell. In 1998, Congress investigated the bizarre ties between the Clinton administration, the Chinese military, and a series of fundraisers for Democratic causes.

Starting in 1995, Schwartz gave around a quarter of million dollars to the DNC and related groups. Less than three months after the last contribution, Bill Clinton approved the launches of four U.S. satellites on Chinese rockets. And less than a month after that -- on March 14, 1996 -- Clinton moved the satellite licensing function from Defense to the Commerce Department over objections from the military and intelligence communities. It gets worse. Read the summary from MSNBC in 1998 (when the network still had news and investigative departments) for a series of shocking revelations that, truthfully, deserve to be told and retold during Hillary Clinton's campaign.

Back to the New School and the Hillraisers: the New School -- by its own admission -- is a "legendary, progressive university" that produces "economists and actors, fashion designers and urban planners, dancers and anthropologists, orchestra conductors, filmmakers, political scientists, organizational experts, jazz musicians, scholars, psychologists, historians, journalists, and above all, world citizens-individuals..."

Whether the school is a breeding ground for open-border socialists I'll leave to the conspiracy theorists among us. I was more intrigued by the revelation that Hsu, Hochberg, and Schwartz were board members/trustees of the school. I wrote a small program that would analyze the list of board members or trustees (around 200 names) and compare it to the list of around 200 "Hillraisers" -- Hillary's donation bundlers who had contributed $100,000 or more to her campaign.

I no longer trust the Hillary site's list of Hillraisers, since Mr. Hsu has disappeared from the list. Instead, I used the list for all presidential candidates operated by WhiteHouseForSale.org, which tracks bundlers for both parties.

Using a soundex algorithm -- rather than an exact name match -- I found that there are not three, but at least eight Hillraisers who are also board members or trustees of the New School. They are:

John Catsimatidis
Barbaralee Diamonstein (Diamonstein-Spielvogel in The New School's Annual Report)
Blair/Cheryl Effron (Blair is a Hillraiser, wife Cheryl on the New School list)
Fred Hochberg
Norman Hsu
Bernard Schwartz
Jay Snyder
Sally Susman

It would be interesting to determine whether -- besides Hsu and Hochberg -- other patterns of apparently bogus donations exist between the New School Hillraisers.

Saturday, September 22, 2007

New York state issues drivers licenses for illegals

 
Gordon Taylor at Red State:

The question before the state [of New York] was, "What should we do to get rid of illegal aliens driving illegally in New York State?"

A. When stopped for a traffic violation, arrest them for driving without a license.

B. When stopped for a traffic violation, arrest them for driving without a license and also for being here illegally and deport them.

C. Apologize for the inconvenience and send them on their way with a free lottery ticket.

D. Escort them to the nearest Department of Motor Vehicles to get a license.

The answer the state chose was... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...D

The New York Post summarized the ramifications for residents of the state.

Gov. Spitzer announced yesterday that illegal immigrants will get driver's licenses - but at a cost to legal citizens because they'll now be useless as airport ID... Spitzer said the state would no longer require a Social Security number or proof that a person is not eligible for such a number in order to qualify for a driver's license.

...States that fail to meet the [2005] standards will lose their certification by the Department of Homeland Security, meaning that driver's licenses in those states will no longer be valid for air travel, entry to federal facilities and for tax purposes... Travelers will now have to carry a second form of ID, like a passport, which was met with criticism yesterday.

"To outright dismiss the security needs of our state and nation and provide illegal aliens documentation is dangerous and inconceivable," said Sen. Dale Volker (R-Depew)... "Gov. Spitzer should not view New York state driver's licenses like baseball cards - handing them out just to score political points."

Rep. Peter King (R-L.I.), the ranking member on the House Committee on Homeland Security, said: "I strongly disagree with giving state-authorized IDs to illegal immigrants. More importantly, this proposal raises serious homeland-security concerns..."

True, but I can think of few other concerns as well.

Such as the possibility of illegal voting scams that would benefit the likes of Hillary Clinton and Spitzer himself.

Story idea: Larwyn. McLovin's drivers' license: Gothamist. UBL's license adapted from: TRJ.

Why did Canada's member of parliament cross the road?

 
Answer: To get to the better health-care on the U.S. side.

Canada's CTV reports (hat tip: Texas Rainmaker):

Liberal MP Belinda Stronach, who is battling breast cancer, travelled to California last June for an operation that was recommended as part of her treatment, says a report... Stronach's spokesman, Greg MacEachern, told the Toronto Star that the MP for Newmarket-Aurora had a "later-stage" operation in the U.S. after a Toronto doctor referred her.

...He said speed was not the reason why she went to California.... Instead, MacEachern said the decision was made because the U.S. hospital was the best place to have it done due to the type of surgery required...

Our thoughts and prayers are with Stronach, who faces a grave medical crisis.

But the lesson learned is a simple one. As in the UK, it appears government elites often opt out of the public health-care system in order to pursue private health-care solutions. Advocates of HillaryCare v2.0 would do well to ruminate on that fact --- long and hard.

Friday, September 21, 2007

Hillary in Deep Hsit

 
The walls around Castle Hillary are crumbling. The blogosphere is slowly unwinding the back-story of the inscrutable Mr. Norman Hsu. Suitably Flip has the details -- and they are flat-out startling (hat tips: Anchoress and Larwyn).

If there's one thing that can be said about Clinton financial scandals, it's that they tend to be complex. And thus far, the Norman Hsu debacle is living up to the archetype... The mystery of Hsu's [choice of candidates] is a vexing one. Enlightenment, however, appears to be tucked away in a single transaction listed in a NYC Campaign Finance Board disclosure... [it's] peculiar. As an A-list Democratic fundraiser, Hsu is typically the bundler in these transactions, not the bundlee. So what gives?

Lillian Vernon is a trinket catalog company... founded by Lillian Hochberg in Mount Vernon, NY (clever, eh?) in 1951. Lillian's son Fred is the current CEO and his brother David is an executive at the company... If you run a search for Fred Hochberg's own federal political contributions, the telltale Hsu pattern once again emerges.

...Fred Hochberg... [is] a fellow HillRaiser... Hochberg is also a dean at the New School, where Hsu was a trustee until this scandal broke last month and the school hurriedly removed his name from their website. Also on the New School board is Bernard Schwartz, one of Bill Clinton's biggest financial backers and the central figure in Clinton's scandal involving the sale of missile technology to China.

And the lily gilder: Fred Hochberg was a member of President Clinton's Cabinet.

Read it all, folks. Hsu's links to China, ICBM technology, and Bill Clinton's scandal-ridden administration are still a bit fuzzy, but they are starting to come into focus.

The dirty money flowing to the Democratic Party from Hsu alone is about to surpass that of the Abramoff scandal. Somehow I don't think we'll see the same sort of coverage in the mainstream media.

But facts are facts and it's clear Hillary's campaign is beginning to crumble like a stale cracker.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

The Pardons 'R' Us Circus

 
Last week, Tony Rodham -- Hillary Clinton's brother -- settled an old lawsuit of infamous origins. Rodham was accused of failing to repay $107,000 plus interest to the estate of a carnival operator and his wife.

Mysteriously, the mainstream media didn't cover the story.

The couple -- Allen and Vonna Jo Gregory -- received pardons for bank fraud convictions from President Bill Clinton after Rodham became a paid consultant to a carnival business the couple owned.

I'm sure that was just a coincidence.

Rodham had claimed that the money he received from the Gregorys was for "consulting services," but attorneys said it was a loan.

Rodham said he had talked to his brother-in-law about the pardon, but went on to add that President Clinton made the decision to grant clemency on the merits of their case. And he said that with a straight face.

Another of Hillary's brothers, Hugh Rodham, became a beneficiary of Pardons-R-Us. He "was paid more than $400,000 for his successful efforts to win pardons for a businessman under investigation for money laundering and a commutation for a convicted drug trafficker. He eventually returned the money at his sister's request."

As his presidency drew to a close, Clinton pardoned 140 people, including billionaire fugitive Marc Rich. Rich's ex-wife, Denise Rich, contributed nearly a half million dollars to the Clinton presidential library project, $1.1 million to the Democratic Party, and at least $109,000 to Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign.

A circus is an entirely appropriate theme for this bunch of clowns.

Hillary's National Security Adviser is a Convicted Thief

 
Surprise!


"Excuse me, Mr. Berger! What's that you're carrying out?"

The mainstream media hasn't noticed one of Hillary's key national security advisers, Sandy Berger.

The more experienced Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, has relied largely on her husband and a triumvirate of senior officials from his presidency—former secretary of state Madeleine Albright, former U.N. ambassador Richard Holbrooke and former national-security adviser Sandy Berger (who tries to keep a low profile after pleading guilty in 2005 to misdemeanor charges of taking classified material without authorization).

That Hillary would name an admitted thief like Berger to this position says all you need to know about the Democrats and national security.

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

How did a wanted fugitive get so close to the Clintons?

 
How did a fugitive cozy up to powerful Democrats who are under Secret Service protection? That's the question Michelle Malkin is asking.

A law-enforcement source tells Michelle that the Clintons' favorite fundraiser, Norman Hsu, should have been instantly identified as a fugitive by the Secret Service. Unless, of course, they were asked not to.

Hsu as a key Dem fundraiser had access to VIP among the Dem party like the Clintons. Both Mr. and Mrs. Clinton are protected by the Secret Service. SOP for law enforcement protection details is to check the criminal background of those who might come in contact with the protectees.

As you probably are already aware, it is well known that usually the Secret Service asks for, at a minimum, full legal name, DOB and SSN of those who get anywhere near/attend events with, SS protectees, so they can run a record check. (FYI the Secret Service record check is, ‘unofficially’, considered one of the most extensive that can be done by US law enforcement.)

So if the Secret Service knew for years that Hsu was a wanted FUGITIVE why did they:

1. Not do anything?

2. Allow him anywhere near any important (high value) targets like either of the Clintons?

Alternatively, if the SS did not do its basic ‘due diligence’ check then the questions are even more pointed:

1. Why not? Who ordered them not to do it, and why? (What did the Clinton’s know and when did they know it?)

2. Was the Clinton (and by extension, the Democrat) fund-raising machine so focused on money that they would violate basic security protocol... letting a wanted, fugitive, felon (of questionable background — from part of the world where their are many hostile to US governmental interests) get into the “inner circle” simply because of the cash?

Well, Bill Clinton is still the only president to have irretrievably lost the nuclear launch codes all CINCs are required to carry. And he didn't seem to have any problem ensuring that sensitive missile technology could slither to the Chinese Military in return for the requisite campaign donations.

Pity the mainstream media only gets excited about OJ and Britney.